Got questions? Ask us.
The Tale of a QDM Club by Dave Edwards
Own Your Own by Virgil Peritts
What Is TSI? by Matt Ross, QDMA
Native vs. Non-Native by Gabriel Karns, M. Colter Chitwood, Chris Moorman, and Dr. Chris DePerno
Oaks For Bucks by Chris Moorman
Deer Season: A Time For Kids by Stephanie Mallory
The Need For Minerals by Brian Murphy, QDMA
Perlitz Ranch Hosts Youth Camp by Kelly Haydel
Timing the Rut With Fawns by Gabriel Karns, M. Colter Chitwood
Ecological Reasons For Hunting by Dr. R. Larry Marchinton and Dr. Karl V. Miller
What percentage of a buck's antler development potential comes from the doe's genes? by Realtree Whitetail Team
Where were the bucks? by Team Realtree
Growths on Deer? by Team Realtree
How Many Teats? by Team Realtree
Why No Oaks? by Team Realtree
Special thanks to:
Quality Deer
Management Association
Whitetail Insider
How Accurate Are We?
Just how accurate are most hunters when it comes to delivering a fatal bullet or arrow to a white-tailed deer?
Probably not as accurate as you think. Over the past 50 years, numerous studies have addressed the efficiency of gun hunters and archers. In this article, we will review a portion of the research to describe the evolution of hunter marksmanship.
A study by Van Etten, R.C., D.F. Switzenberg, and L. Eberhardt published in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 1965, conducted controlled deer hunting in a square-mile enclosure.
Over the course of seven years, a highly-regulated hunt was conducted inside a square-mile enclosure. Even under the most stringent of restrictions, there was a 10-15% crippling loss (animals killed but not recovered during the hunt) using firearms.
In another study, despite good hunting conditions and instructions to shoot only when confident of a clean kill, hunters killed 211 deer but missed an additional 97 individuals according to a paper that appeared in the Journal of Wildlife Management in 1973 (Holsworth, W.N. ). Only 11 deer were reported wounded. Additionally, only 50% of the deer hit with one bullet immediately dropped. Also, hunters using open-sighted rifles were as accurate as scoped-rifle hunters.
In a shotgun-only hunt inside a NASA fence-enclosed property, hunters harvested 1,330 deer with an estimated crippling loss of 15%. That information was reported in a 1980 Wildlife Society Bulletin authored by Palmer, D.T., D. A. Andrews, R.O. Winters, and J.W. Francis.
Using traditional archery equipment (recurves and longbows), bowhunters at Fort McAlester Army Ammunition Plant in Oklahoma wounded 11 of the 22 collared bucks that were shot in a 1998 study reports at the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Of the 11 wounded bucks, 8 made full recoveries. The three wounded bucks that died (14% crippling rate) were all struck in the paunch.
A controlled archery deer hunt in a residential community in Connecticut was held in 1999. After qualified archers delivered 314 of 330 arrows into the vitals of a 3-D archery target, they recovered only 19 of 27 deer that were arrowed. An additional nine deer were completely missed.
After 18 years of recorded bowhunting at the Navy facility in Indian Head, Maryland, hunters wounded 18% of white-tailed deer according to a 2009 report by .Pedersen, M.A., S. Berry, and J.C. Bossart given at the 2nd Annual Meeting of the Southeast Deer Study Group Interestingly, bowhunters using crossbow equipment were as efficient as compound archers.
A couple of lessons from these studies:
1. More advanced and efficient weapons do not mean more accurate and efficient hunters. Technology DOES NOT eliminate “buck fever.”
2. Crippling rates of 10-20% were consistent throughout studies. Deer managers may wish to include crippling rates in population management decisions and harvest models.
3. In past years, I have cringed to hear hunters say, “If it had been a nice buck and not just a doe, I would have searched longer for that deer.” Any deer, regardless of sex, age, or size, is worthy of a hunter’s full respect and best effort in recovery.
4. Perhaps the best lesson learned from these studies is that hunters should be aware that crippling loss is likely to occur regardless of weapon type. However, we all must be ethical and responsible to reduce and try to eliminate all crippling and wounding losses. The best recommendation is to practice year-round so that you are familiar with your weapon and how you perform with it.
About the authors: Gabriel Karns M. S. is with the Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences Program, Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources at North Carolina State University and M. Colter Chitwood is an M. S. candidate in the Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences Program, Department of Forestry and Environmental Resources, at North Carolina State University.